Layers of resistance: Understanding decision-making processes in relation to crime reporting
| Published date | 01 September 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0269758019827686 |
| Date | 01 September 2019 |
| Author | Stevie-Jade Hardy |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Layers of resistance:
Understanding decision-
making processes in relation
to crime reporting
Stevie-Jade Hardy
University of Leicester, UK
Abstract
Underreporting has been a longstanding problem for criminal justice agencies, which masks the
true scale of crime taking place and prevents victims from accessing justice and support. Using
empirical evidence collected from more than 2,000 victims who came from different backgrounds
and who had experienced different forms of crimes, this article proposes a new theoretical model
to enhance our understanding of underreporting. This model highlights that victim decision making
is influenced by structural, social, situational and individual barriers, which interact symbiotically to
create layers of resistance to reporting. The article concludes by considering what steps aca-
demics, policymakers and practitioners can take to dismantle these barriers and to improve
reporting rates.
Keywords
Victims, victimisation, underreporting, justice
Introduction
One of the most pervasive challenges facing criminal justice agencies and other relevant organisa-
tions around the world is underreporting. It is widely acknowledged that official figures are a
considerable underestimate of the actual number of crimes taking place (Maguire and McVie,
2017). The sheer volume of victims who are prevented from accessing justice and support is
illustrative of the collective failure of agencies to develop, implement and resource policy inter-
ventions that connect with the lived realities and challenges facing victims of crime. The issue of
underreporting has been discussed extensively within the criminological literature, with research
Corresponding author:
Dr Stevie-Jade Hardy, Department of Criminology, University of Leicester, 154 Upper New Walk, Leicester LE1 7QA, UK.
Email: sjh128@le.ac.uk
International Review of Victimology
2019, Vol. 25(3) 302–319
ªThe Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0269758019827686
journals.sagepub.com/home/irv
revealing the different barriers that victims may face on the basis of their identity or background, or
as a result of the form of victimisation that they have experienced (Goudriaan et al., 2005; Skogan,
1984). Similarly, the importance of reporting in the context of enabling effective prioritisation and
service delivery is well documented within key sources of policy guidance (see, inter alia, HM
Government, 2016, 2017; Home Office, 2016). Despite growing recognition of how reluctant
victims can be about reporting to the police, there has been little in the way of meaningful action
to dismantle the barriers that they face. In fact, state-level discourse continually reinforces the idea
that the responsibility to report crime rests solely with the victim, but this comes with assurances
that when victims do cross that threshold then reports will be dealt with seriously, sensitively and
swiftly. Such rhetoric demonstrates a simplistic understanding of decision making in relation to
reporting, ignoring the multiple, interrelated barriers that people face after experiencing victimisa-
tion and which prevent them from reporting to the police.
In some ways, criminological research within the United Kingdom (UK) and further afield has
not assisted in enhancing this understanding because issues of underreporting have tended to be
explored through a narrow analytical lens, meaning that knowledge has been generated on specific
forms of crime and specific victim types. Similarly, many of the theoretical frameworks that have
been developed to describe the decision-making process have tended to rely on data from large-
scale victim surveys – such as the British Crime Survey – within which many marginalised and
disempowered groups are underrepresented . This article seeks to address these limitation s by
proposing a new model to explain underreporting in a more holistic way, drawing upon the
perceptions and experiences of a diverse sample of more than 2,000 victims. This model highlights
that victim decision making is influenced by structural, social, situational and individual factors,
which interact concurrently to create layers of resistance to reporting. The implication is that if
criminal justice agencies and other relevant organisations across the globe do not adopt a much
more proactive and intelligence-led approa ch to dismantling these barriers, then resistanc e to
reporting is likely to become more entrenched and the gulf between the recorded figure of crime
and the actual amount taking place is likely to expand further.
Background
Underreporting – or more specifically the decision-making process in relation to reporting – has
been the subject of criminological enquiry for decades, and yet the issue continues to present
considerable challenges for criminal justice agencies around the world. Reporting criminal activity
is important for a number of reasons. At a state level, rates of reporting are thought to symbolise the
extent to which a country’s citizens trust government institutions, with the suggestion being that
the countries with higher rates of reporting have ‘good democratic health’ (Terente et al., 2017:
154). Reporting also has significant practical implications; criminal justice legislation, policies and
practices are often informed by what has been reported by victims and witnesses to the police
(Baumer and Lauritsen, 2010; Slocum et al., 2010). Non-reporting of criminal incidents can lead to
inaccurate intelligence, and thus the policy and budget decisions that are based upon reported and
recorded data are likely to have limited effectiveness (Terente et al., 2017). Similarly, criminal
justice agencies are somewhat hamp ered in their ability to investigate and prosecute a crime
without being notified of the incident, which is why victims are considered to be the ‘gatekeepers’
of the criminal justice system (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 1988: 16). Finally, and arguably most
importantly, reporting enables victims to become ‘visible’ to criminal justice agencies and to other
relevant organisations, which should result in victims being able to access practical and/or
Hardy 303
To continue reading
Request your trial